OTHER VOICES

Fiscal crisis could lead to disarmament by default

By Mike EmigSpecial to the Star-Banner

Published: Sunday, April 21, 2013 at 6:30 a.m.

Last Modified: Friday, April 19, 2013 at 4:57 p.m.

There is a big debate going on in this country on the size of the budget and the national debt. Each service will be taking a hard look at what programs to cut. Already due to cuts caused by the sequester, we've seen air show participation cut, travel cut, civilian furloughs and, recently, the standdown of 17 combat squadrons in order to conserve flying hours for those units about to deploy and those in combat zones.

The Department of Defense can only reduce the overhead costs of administration, maintenance and medical by cutting into warfighting capabilities. We have a national debt standing at nearly $12 trillion dollars and growing every day, and it's expected to be $21 trillion dollars by the end of this decade. We all have to make tough choices but we have to make smart ones as we drawdown the military and our forces.

What programs do we cut or cancel? We fly tankers more than 50 years old. How much longer can we delay replacing them? Our fighters are on average 25 years old and are reaching the end of their life cycles. How much longer can we expect our men and women to fly aircraft that may break up in flight? Can we really afford to shortchange our nation's defense?

Defense spending seems high, considering we've been fighting two wars and supporting an all-volunteer force. But defense spending is still only roughly 4 percent of Gross Domestic Product. It was at 35 percent during World War II and 9 percent during the Cold War.

Defense spending reigned during the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s. In 1970, total defense spending was 8.1 percent of our GDP — more than twice the 3.8 percent spent on the big three entitlement programs, but starting in 1971 entitlement spending surpassed defense and today stands at over 13 percent of GDP.

Entitlement spending is on the road to absorbing more of the federal budget as the baby boom generation retires and ages. The result is that, eventually, this will crowd out defense spending and limit what the government can provide in military and economic growth.

At the end of the Cold War in 1991, recapitalization funds were taken to pay for a peace dividend. New equipment planned and programmed were eventually bought in small numbers while other programs were delayed. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan further delayed recapitalization to the point that perhaps not long from now the U.S. may undergo disarmament by default — something none of our enemies could accomplish.

One of the primary responsibilities of Congress, according to the U.S. Constitution, Section 8, is to “provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States.” Unless Congress reins in spending it will find itself unable to live up to its responsibilities under the Constitution and we will find our military a hollow force when we'll need it the most.

Mike Emig is Florida State/Region president of the Air Force Association and lives in Ocala.

<p>There is a big debate going on in this country on the size of the budget and the national debt. Each service will be taking a hard look at what programs to cut. Already due to cuts caused by the sequester, we've seen air show participation cut, travel cut, civilian furloughs and, recently, the standdown of 17 combat squadrons in order to conserve flying hours for those units about to deploy and those in combat zones.</p><p>The Department of Defense can only reduce the overhead costs of administration, maintenance and medical by cutting into warfighting capabilities. We have a national debt standing at nearly $12 trillion dollars and growing every day, and it's expected to be $21 trillion dollars by the end of this decade. We all have to make tough choices but we have to make smart ones as we drawdown the military and our forces.</p><p>What programs do we cut or cancel? We fly tankers more than 50 years old. How much longer can we delay replacing them? Our fighters are on average 25 years old and are reaching the end of their life cycles. How much longer can we expect our men and women to fly aircraft that may break up in flight? Can we really afford to shortchange our nation's defense?</p><p>Defense spending seems high, considering we've been fighting two wars and supporting an all-volunteer force. But defense spending is still only roughly 4 percent of Gross Domestic Product. It was at 35 percent during World War II and 9 percent during the Cold War.</p><p>Defense spending reigned during the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s. In 1970, total defense spending was 8.1 percent of our GDP — more than twice the 3.8 percent spent on the big three entitlement programs, but starting in 1971 entitlement spending surpassed defense and today stands at over 13 percent of GDP.</p><p>Entitlement spending is on the road to absorbing more of the federal budget as the baby boom generation retires and ages. The result is that, eventually, this will crowd out defense spending and limit what the government can provide in military and economic growth.</p><p>At the end of the Cold War in 1991, recapitalization funds were taken to pay for a peace dividend. New equipment planned and programmed were eventually bought in small numbers while other programs were delayed. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan further delayed recapitalization to the point that perhaps not long from now the U.S. may undergo disarmament by default — something none of our enemies could accomplish.</p><p>One of the primary responsibilities of Congress, according to the U.S. Constitution, Section 8, is to “provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States.” Unless Congress reins in spending it will find itself unable to live up to its responsibilities under the Constitution and we will find our military a hollow force when we'll need it the most.</p><p><i>Mike Emig is Florida State/Region president of the Air Force Association and lives in Ocala.</i></p>